[sdiy] MIDI isn't musical : Flame bait?

[harry]

Well if its a flame war... ;^P

Carosine ???    (an unusual spelling...)

How about Gasoline (or Petrol ?) Burns better.  Maybe throw in some
aluminum
powder as well.

I vote for MIDI is "okay".  It was intended for keyboards... and not a lot
of them...
and stinks for continuous controllers.  If you really want trouble... try
MIDI Guitar
synthesis... sic simultaneous channels in mono mode.. with pitch bend from
hell on every channel. Added to the already horrible timing of the
conversion process itself...
its a good 30-40mS.

OTOH - I produced my CD using a MIDI sequencing system. I'm not a great
keyboard player and used the tools to carefully prepare (and edit edit
edit) each
track. I'm satisfied with the result. The only problems that I had were the
pitchbend
messages.

The industry has a working solution... they will not change. Why should
they?  Most
users (non-pro) could not care less.

I would probably not buy an enhanced communication system at this point
unless it
had backward compatibility... I have too much MIDI-shit now.  Is that last
expression significant ? Maybe yes... maybe no...

H^) harry


Magnus Danielson wrote:

> From: Don Tillman <don at till.com>
> Subject: Re: [sdiy] MIDI isn't musical : Flame bait?
> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 10:17:04 -0800
>
> >    Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:17:36 +0000
> >    From: David Hughes <dhughes at globalnet.co.uk>
> >
> >    Don Tillman <don at till.com> wrote :
> >    > Because MIDI is unmusical.
> >
> >    Oh, this is complete rubbish! This must be flame bait!
> >    Don, are you *really* serious?
> >
> > Dead serious.
> >
> > Midi is a very limited protocol and just not capable of representing
> > most musical events; say, the intro to Jimi Hendrix' "Voodoo Chile"
> > or a John Coltrane sax solo.
> >
> > "That's not fair, MIDI is intended for keyboard-oriented music."
> >
> > Same thing with keyboards.  MIDI's limited command set and gross
> > timing distortion are not capable of conveying the individuality, the
> > personality, the touch or the inspiration of a given keyboard or a
> > given player.  If your goal is a musical instrument this stuff is
> > important.
> >
> > How's that for a flame?
>
> Just to trow carosine on the fire...
>
> I agree that MIDI is a very limited protocol. But I also go along and
> say that it is too limited for keyboard oriented music too.
>
> If we look back at the very early MIDI stuff, then it was about
> adequate, but since then people poored in more and more stuff into it,
> more than it was originally designed for. There is the 7-bit headache,
> there is lots of equipment specific interpretation, the slow speed,
> the lack of good timing, the lack of good topology support (MIDI works
> well with one sender multiple receivers, and when you have
> interactivity over MIDI it hurts). There is also no isolation of
> traffic, which gives uncertainties in timings.
>
> There are many flaws in MIDI, it's just basic facts. I can't see that
> there is a flame-bait in that.
>
> Let me also assure you that I have no confidence that the industry is
> able to come up with a working replacement. They have failed up till
> now, and I have no confidence in that they will address all the
> necessary aspects.
>
> I've looked at the possibility of a MIDI-replacement, and there is
> many pot-holes in that road.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus

--
Jihad Terrorism Conspiracy New World Order
Revolution Black Helicopters Freedom of
Speech First Amendment Rights: Carnivore Bait
go ahead and READ my e-mail I have nothing to
hide... how about YOU ???